81–90 of 108 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're saying the bus didn't exist?
Reading is hard I guess. I'm saying Brexit was not sold as being positive for the economy. Yes the bus probably existed, and as I said, the argument was made that the excess in EU contribution would be spent domestically instead. But improving the economy was not the main argument of the Leave. They always mostly acknowledged that it would be a bit unknown, but whatever happened would be worth it if it meant more sov…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was totally a rigged referendum, that bus hoarding propaganda somehow worked and the masses fell for the lies. But a great number didn't and it was barely lost by a few percentage points. David Cameron should have stayed and battled it out instead of resigning.
David Cameron may be the biggest idiot in almost 300 years of British Prime Ministers, and there's been a few beauties. He really could have done a better job with the whole referendum business. Up/Down only. No "by a majority of...". No requirement for a second referendum on the terms of the disengagement agreement. Asking him to stay around would have been like asking the driver that drove you over the cliff to dri…
One argument against Scottish independence vote just 2 (!) years prior was that Scotland would lose membership in the EU. And they really like this one it seems, with 62% voting to remain.
But since they're only 8% of the population and apparently don't count, they instead got Brexited against their will. Similar with Northern Ireland and, I suppose, Good Friday agreement.
Wales voted to leave, for some reason. Maybe they hoped one of the weekly hospital builds would happen there.
"The question was never whether this would involve costs" Brexit was sold as being positive for the economy. The proponents drove a bus around saying they would get 350 million back. It was largely advertised as a net positive for the economy
It's almost like the academics who said that free-trade and globalization were net benefits to the economy were right , and then reversing globalization and shutting borders simply reverses those gains. The interesting part is that while the benefits of globalization were not evenly distributed (part of the reason for the populist backlash against it), reversing it does not seem to benefit the people who were harmed…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regarding the UK specifically, very few people chose to study in the EU when they could while many in the EU wanted to study in the UK. British unis are a huge asset to the country that also brings a lot of money from foreign students. Same for young people wanting to come work in UK/London. Frankly, I think the "harm" done to young British people is vastly overblown and more symbolic than actual.
Young people voted against Brexit by 2 to 1. If anything they are more opposed now. Perhaps they know if they've been harmed or not.
Even today, they can obviously register to study abroad, just need a visa like everyone else, and considering the English unis' tuition fees they would actually save money by doing so but hardly anyone does because of the language barrier (same as when the UK was in the EU).
So IMHO it is a case of FOMO.
It's the EU students who have lost out because they must now pay hefty tuition fees (like £35k+ a year) if they wish to study in British unis so most of them have given up. British unis don't really care because they are in high demand globally, anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you compare UK to its equivalent developed countries (France, Germany, Italy, etc. ), without including the developing EU economies of Eastern Europe, you get that the UK’s GDP growth has outperformed the rest since brexit happened.
Have you a source? Using IMF data for GDP per capita PPP, the UK's growth has underperformed that of France, Spain and Italy over the last 10 years. In 2016 the UK's per-capita GDP in international dollars exceeded that of France by approx. $1600, estimates for 2026 are showing France being ahead by about $1000.
* UK $40.8k -> $61.1k = +49.5%
* Germany $48.0k -> $65.3k = +36.2%
* France $39.2k -> $52.1k = +32.8%
* Italy $32.0k -> $46.5k = +45.5%
* Spain $27.2k -> $41.6k = +52.9%
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you a source? Using IMF data for GDP per capita PPP, the UK's growth has underperformed that of France, Spain and Italy over the last 10 years. In 2016 the UK's per-capita GDP in international dollars exceeded that of France by approx. $1600, estimates for 2026 are showing France being ahead by about $1000.
Brexit happened in 2020. GDP/capita change since then: * UK $40.8k -> $61.1k = +49.5% * Germany $48.0k -> $65.3k = +36.2% * France $39.2k -> $52.1k = +32.8% * Italy $32.0k -> $46.5k = +45.5% * Spain $27.2k -> $41.6k = +52.9%
2019–2020 are the worst years to start a comparison, because the UK uses a different accounting method to measure the government's contribution to GDP. So, COVID looks much worse in the UK and the recovery looks much better.
"The question was never whether this would involve costs" Brexit was sold as being positive for the economy. The proponents drove a bus around saying they would get 350 million back. It was largely advertised as a net positive for the economy
Brexit was a "stop migration by getting out of europe" thing. That was how it was sold, that was how it was ordered. That was not how it was delivered. This is also why the same people get the same votes against the boats again. If a democratic system can not offer and deliver what the people want - the people will vote for system dismantling till they get it.
Immigration was definitely a factor, but there were a lot of people —despite strong expert opposition— saying it would be an economic golden age. Being able to trade with everyone on our own terms. Being free our exporters of red tape while maintaining our existing trade and supply routes.
Of course this was wrong. 49% of the country was screaming it was wrong. But there were enough people swayed on moderate promises that things could be better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no making "the most" out of Brexit the same way there isn't a way to make "the most" out of sawing your own leg off. It was completely unforced self-mutilation. The fact they're still hobbling on is commendable, but it's still much worse than they would've been off otherwise.
That isn't true, and a ridiculous take. There are pros and cons to both being in and out of the EU.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was totally a rigged referendum, that bus hoarding propaganda somehow worked and the masses fell for the lies. But a great number didn't and it was barely lost by a few percentage points. David Cameron should have stayed and battled it out instead of resigning.
David Cameron may be the biggest idiot in almost 300 years of British Prime Ministers, and there's been a few beauties. He really could have done a better job with the whole referendum business. Up/Down only. No "by a majority of...". No requirement for a second referendum on the terms of the disengagement agreement. Asking him to stay around would have been like asking the driver that drove you over the cliff to dri…